cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Development of Creative Commons licenses
List archive
Re: [cc-licenses] Attribution: accurate credit should not be forbidden
- From: drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>
- To: Development of Creative Commons licenses <cc-licenses AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [cc-licenses] Attribution: accurate credit should not be forbidden
- Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:38:10 -0400
On Tuesday 30 April 2013 12:58:02 Kat Walsh wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Kim Tucker <kctucker AT gmail.com> wrote:
> > imo, if a free culture is what we want to achieve, there is a missing
> > license: SA 4.0 - an update of
> > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sa/1.0/ which was retired because
> > less than 2% of the community wanted it. Who knows what might have
> > happened if it had not been retired?
>
> [...]
>
> > My main point is that the burden of attribution should be minimised to
> > expedite a free culture. Make it as simple as possible.
>
> One note that I'd like to point out: it is always possible to release your
> own work under a CC license without requiring attribution, if you would
> like to do so. You may either grant others that permission on top of the
> existing license, or you may simply not provide attribution information
> (which means that those who want to share the work are not obligated to
> give attribution).
Right but that does not require non-attribution propogation as a plain SA
would. Correct?
>
> -Kat
all the best,
drew
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Attribution: accurate credit should not be forbidden,
Kim Tucker, 04/28/2013
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Attribution: accurate credit should not be forbidden,
Kat Walsh, 04/30/2013
- Re: [cc-licenses] Attribution: accurate credit should not be forbidden, drew Roberts, 04/30/2013
- Re: [cc-licenses] Attribution: accurate credit should not be forbidden, Anthony, 04/30/2013
-
Re: [cc-licenses] Attribution: accurate credit should not be forbidden,
Kat Walsh, 04/30/2013
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.